638 comments:

C. The baby's blanket etc he never let's go of were in the truck...so I think that's where the last place Deorr Jr was, perhaps sleeping and an accident happened. Deorr Sr talked about "up" the mountain unnecessarily. .that's where he laid the baby "to rest"

I believe Deorr died by accidental death and his parents decided to hide his body.

Initially, I wanted to believe his parents, I also wanted to blame Isaac.

However, I concluded the parents have guilty knowledge in large part because, while they talk about others searching, they were not able to tell us they searched for the child they claim was missing. Also, the father's language when he was supposed to have returned from "exploring" and found that his son was missing is story-building, unreliable and deceptive.

I think the truck ride by dad, as Peter has noted, is significant. I have three guesses. 1= he went to hide drugs. 2= he accidentally hit Deorr with the truck 3= There was an attempt to take an injured Deorr to the hospital but he died quickly on the trip and reviving him was not possible. I lean towards 2 and/or 3 due to his language that he was in a hurry. If Deorr's body were to be hidden, fake 911 call planned- disposing of drugs would not need to be done quickly. If he thought his son had wandered off, I believe he would have been driving cautiously and looking as he drove. He doesn't say that so I can't.

I believe Jessica's prior record and custody issues led the parents to hide the accidental death.

I'm not sure how Deorr died but it was an accident by neglect. Drug use by parents is likely. As the story about dad returning and asking ggf where Deorr was is story building, I do not believe Deorr was left in ggf's care. Since "getting ready for nap" was introduced but left hanging in the narrative, I wonder if Deorr was put down for a nap and left unsupervised.

I think the sheriff suspects the parents. He tells us when he still has doubts that LE might not have searched vehicles well enough. That Deorr might have been in a "compartment." He can't prove they are lying, so he needs to say they are cooperative.

If the parents are honest about their timeline, I just don't believe Isaac could have gotten away with it without major suspicion by parents. If they suspected him, I think we would have seen it in their language. That Isaac is nowhere in their initial interview makes me think they do not want him known as a witness to what happened. If Deorr died elsewhere and parents went to the campground to cover it up, I find it unexpected they'd bring a man they just met as an accomplice.

I do believe the parents' pain is real despite the fact they are withholding what happened.

I think it's likely that drug use was the reason for their walk to 'explore' without the baby. (Why do adults need to go exploring? If you've seen one creek, you've pretty much seen them all! They needed to get away from the baby for a min, which leads me to think of drug use.)

I think his body was hidden and the missing/abduction story was crafted due to Jessica's previous custody issues, and perhaps fear that whatever drug/activities were going on when the accident happened would lead to them being criminally charged.

If the life insurance thing is true, I believe it was premeditated injury/death. The "story" is deceptive, and it seems rehearsed with the father dominating speech and cutting off the motherwhen ever she tries to talk. The beginning of interview is story-building. I hate to say this is what I believe but the other options seem too far-fetched. If accidental injury, why wouldnt they just tell LE the son had an accident and died. Why would they hide a body and go through this lengthy ruse of looking for a supposedly missing or abducted child?

I think it is odd how the Dad seems to almost revel in the fact that all the most sophisticated equipment found not a "trace of his son" in the campsite area. I can't quite put my finger on it, but it almost seems like pride that these people turned over and every leaf and stone and found nothing. He seems happy about it, and i just don't quite get that. You would think he would have A) wanted his child found alive wandering somewhere or whatever B) some kind of clue found! even if only some kind of clue the "abductor" left behind.

"Fifty yards away and ten minutes, but for time, we, I, seen him to the point I figured out he was gone and I come back up to the creek..."

Listen to what Deorr Sr says... He saw Deorr Jr "to the point I figured out he was gone..." - I see this as leakage that Deorr Sr saw his son die. Same with "dead panic" "I knew I was in trouble" etc. All of it is leakage.

Mom, is angry and despondent because they likely argued as to whether to call 911 or cover up the death by neglect/carelessness - obviously settling on calling later after a cover-up. Deorr Sr was "hauling" in his truck to dispose of evidence or Deorr Jr.

This has been told to Trina and that is why she has satisfying answers without getting honest answers. Because Jessica has told her it was an accident but that doesn't settle for Trina, she doesn't get why they didn't just call the police for help. She doesn't agree with their decision to cover it up and Jessica didn't like it at first and hates it more and more as the days draw out.

Trina wants to keep searching because she wants closure and to bury her grandson and "eventually" they may find Deorr Jr and all evidence will be lost. And the family can bury himand have their long desired closure and Jessica and Deorr Sr can part ways because hatred is brewing between them.

So yes, there are a lot of missing pieces, but precious baby Deorr Jr. 's parents have told us all, he died camping and his parents were more afraid of the laws they may have broken than a decent treatment of their dead son.

I think he may have been accidently killed in a fit of rage by DK. It is possible that DK has lied to Jessica about Baby Deorr's "disappearance" and tricked her into being complicit in a cover up. Eg DK: "don't tell LE what REALLY happened, (drug use, baby left asleep in the car, many hours of her not seeing the baby) because you will lose visitation with your other kids and maybe go to jail)

I can also see him spinning her some bullshit like "I know who kidnapped DeOrr, if LE finds out the kidnappers will kill him! Just leave it to me". Perhaps the truth is dawning/has dawned on Jessica but now she is in too deep. She appears to be a woman caught between a rock and a hard place.

It is strange that DK uses the pronoun "I" (I came up to get him, I came up from the creek, I yelled over to Grandpa) but when asked by Nate who discovered the baby missing, Jessica and DK say (emphatically) "we both did". It is unexpected. Expected would have been "we came up from the creek, we came up to get him" if both of them discovered the baby missing at the same time. It sounds rehearsed.

No worries anon 11:01&11:02, its nice to know I'm not the only one that sounds like leakage to :)

There is so much muck flying around and confusion. Regardless of it all, what I cannot get behind is the utter lack of speaking out to and about their missing son. Bad social media coverage or not, speak out!

The second glaring issue to me is their lack of use of a consistent name for this dear boy. My daughter, we called sis for ages instead of her given name. But we did call her sis. So had she gone missing (gasp!) we would have spoken out to her by that name. We would have told the world what name she responded to. Why not for Deorr Jr? Why doesn't the nation know what that precious child would respond to? Because they have guilty knowledge of his death. It keeps coming back to that. All of it does. I know it still doesn't tell us how he died or where he is, but the reality that his parents know is obvious, no matter what the sheriff says or the PI says.

There is a huge difference between an accident and neglect. He was behind the truck, dad couldn't see him and backed over him, that's an accident. You don't cover that up. They put him to bed in the truck with his blankie, cup and monkey, with the windows rolled up or just slightly cracked and he died of hyperthermia. The temp where they were had a high of 73 degrees. That is negligible homicide if you ask me. That is something you would cover up so you don't go to jail. Mom and dad were gone a lot longer than 10 minutes, or if they weren't, they just assumed he was still sleeping. When they discovered he was dead, the cover-up occurred. Deorr Sr. transported the body at least 1/2 hour away. At least an hour round trip which accounts for the "he's been missing an hour" THERE is where the smoking gun is...Jessica said he had been missing an hour to give dad alibi for being gone and dad with his need to run his mouth, said 20 minutes. If this is what happens, it certainly explains the truck being so sensitive, dad "hauling" "I'm in trouble" etc...If dad went 1/2 hour away from campsite as the crow flies, this would be WAY beyond the search perimeters. Dogs kept coming back to campsite because that is where he died, and then transported to another area. This is my opinion only.

In June 2000, a mother in New Jersey left her son in the car with the windows rolled up for two hours. During that time span, she checked on him several times without realizing the temperature of the vehicle was nearing deadly temperatures. On her final check, she found her son passed out. She rushed him to the hospital, but he later died of heatstroke. An hour after his death, the boy’s body temperature was 108 degrees. The temperature outside the vehicle was in the low 60's

"You couldn't ask for better people - so sincere, so concerned, and they were - everybody was emotionally attached to this, as you, anybody would be of a two year old."

Glad you asked! 2 things have bothered me about it, and I will add a 3rd:

1) I don't like the past tense in the section "everybody WAS emotionally attached to this".

2) I don't like his use of the word "sincere" since there is no reason the searchers would be "insincere" as anyone would earnestly search for a missing toddler. I fear it may indicate some "insincerity" on his part ie. deception, lack of sincere concern.

3) "as you, anybody would be of a 2 year old" : it's like he realizes on some level it was odd to praise the searcher's sincerity so he's kind of covering by adding this part "as, you, anybody would be of a 2 year old"

Lynda, your speculation regarding how Deorr Jr possibly passed is well founded. Sadly, this younger generation seems farther reemoved from responsibility and the decision to hide their mistakes are often top priority to coming clean and taking their consequences to their choices. It is plausible.

MJ, I didn't even notice that "seen him to the point I figured out he was gone". That is some serious leakage.

I also noticed how the Mom commented she "heard no sound of him, no crying": it is an odd way to state that he did not respond to them calling him. I also noticed that if you add ONE word to her statement it would be "heard no sound (OUT) of him, no crying" (I have added the word OUT to her statement. Her statement even without the word "OUT" added to it, is very close to how one might describe someone who had died or was unconscious and unresponsive.

I suspect an unintentional incident/accident occurred which led to baby DeOrr's death and a subsequent cover-up. If I had more knowledge such as when this camping trip was planned, what supplies did they have with them, food, fishing poles etc... I might have a different opinion. I believe the mother is devastated. I haven't a clue about DeOrr Sr. He doesn't talk straight and I am suspicious of him for many reasons. I don't know why the Great Grandfather is being hidden/protected yet indirectly "blamed". I wonder if there is gross incompetence by the police. Who knows about Issac?? There is not enough information released to the public for a definite opinion.

I grew up camping/backpacking with my family in the 1960's and 1970's. My three boys all camped starting as infants to now their teen years. A responsible adult does not leave a baby/toddler/child unattended in the wilderness. The whole story stinks and makes no sense.

I vote neglect and the parents are guilty of neglect. IF their story is true, they neglected their child by leaving him without proper supervision.

I very much agree with Lynda ' s theory.. they left him in the car, found him, and he was already dead.. this could leave the great grandfather and issac innocent in knowledge if the parents fought about this near the truck and away from them. Jessica could have said DK was going to the store and they would have been clueless. Then came back "went to explore" and baby Dj was "missing" (that would also explain the trip to the store.to.buy candy.for deorr) that's when DK hid the body. I don't believe he is anywhere near the campsite. I agree with the thought that he is 1 Hour away. I don't believe it was on purpose, i think it truly was an accident but their fear overcame doing right by deorr. It.may not be soon, but I think eventually JM will confess.

No, not on purpose..but they are negligent. You DONT leave a baby in a car...EVER. Plus if he was wearing a jacket, long pants, that would make him even hotter. I think he had passed out from heat exhaustion and then you're just a hop, skip and jump from hyperthermia. They argued about 911. She blurted he'd been gone an hour. Dad says 20 minutes. Dad made a big deal of not being spotted at store, clerk was mistaken. All the truck talk. He has guilty knowledge of where the body is because he buried him or hid him somewhere. It's been 2 months. If they truly loved their son, they would not leave him out there. At some point, they will go get the remains (after all evidence is lost) and move them to a place where someone (probably a hunter) will stumble upon his bones. They parents can have closure with funeral/burial, public sympathy, and they have the added bonus of getting away with it. JMO

1) With the pronouns all over the place...it's like he's making the emotion of concern as diffuse as possible "you...they...everybody...this...you...anybody" are so concerned. I think, as you pointed out, they do not state that THEY themselves searched. Here, you can see that they also do not say that THEY themselves were emotionally attached or concerned.

2) "would be of a 2 year old" I agree, something is missing from the statement! The situation is too urgent for him to not instinctively say a "missing" 2 year old. Perhaps that is leakage by omission, that the boy is not actually "missing" and that Dad knows where he is?

3) You are right, he very much praises them for their "sincerity", "concern" rather than their work. It is really strange, because the way he praises their equipment and them "risking" their safety, and praising their sincerity, it is a strange focus even if DeOrr had died of accidental death and they hid the body, I would not expect him to divert attention in this manner. I almost wonder if it is a game to him. He just seems to be strangely glad they "found no traces" of DeOrr or any clues within their search radius. I don't know what to think :/

Great ideas Buckley- I'm with you all the way. Those have been my initial thoughts all along, but I wanted to believe the parents, I really did.

I know it's for Angelica, but The "as anyone would be of a two year old" statement to me is very strange.Everybody WAS emotionally attached - so they no longer need to be emotionally attached? And how does he KNOW they no longer need to be emotionally attached?"Of a two year old" is very disturbing as well to me. Why not say as emotionally attached to their two year old? To their child? He makes it seem like it's not even his child he is talking about?Why not say his name?

If Baby DeOrr died in DKs truck, wouldn't the cadaver dogs have alerted to it? I'm wondering, for the thousandth time, if Baby DeOrr was even at the campsite. I would very much like to hear something from GGF and IR.

I know the sheriff said that he is 99 % sure that Baby DeOrr was there; but isn't that the same as saying he is not 100% sure?

Somebody said that thinking about this case is like trying to do a garage sale puzzle. You're not sure if you have all the pieces or even if all the pieces belong to the same puzzle. I agree. What's the deal with not one but two RSOs and the " dumping" of cremains?

He didn't go to sleep as three things he needed for that activity were in the truck: "replica" of security blanket, sippy cup and monkey. He'd trip over these things.He couldn't run as his boots, either camo or cowboy, were too big. Still he could move good for a little guy. (How little men or lil man moves is important why?)He couldn't make it down a steep hill by himself as the reporter claims. (Could he trip and roll down?)Time and distance do not align: gone ten minutes or 150 yards?Drove 1/2 mile to get signal, or somewhere around 10 minutes?Called 9/11 at 2:26 or 2:36 (THE TIME DIFFERENCE EQUIVALENT TO TRAVEL 150 YARDS on foot or haul down a bumpy road appx 1/2 mile)People truly concerned for this boy have or will continue to look under every rock.I believe he is deceased without casting blame.The mother knows he wasn't taken by a stranger; she said "IF" you have....(in reference to an abduction).Discounting a wild animal would be absurd though they found no blood. To pick up something so small as DeOrr and run wouldn't be unheard of. These wildlife creatures can travel anywhere from 20-60 mph. Being clear of the immediate area prior to any blood letting would be beleivable.

They were negligent in their situation. However, I'd rather believe he died there than to have to go through who knows what if this phantom kidnapper has him. (Unlikely scenerio unless he lived nearby since no cars were heard or seen).

I believe it's likely there was an accident and that the parents have covered it up. If so, I believe it happened on Thursday - this because DeOrr deflects the question as to what day DeOrr disappeared; he does not want to lie, but he cannot say yes, it was on Friday, nor will he give away that it was on the Thursday, so instead he says he's not sure what day it is today. Jessica, however, is willing to assert that her son disappeared on the Friday, and that he was playing with her grandfather. DeOrr says his son was GOING to play with grandpa, to be good with grandpa by the campfire, and that he was ready for his nap. DeOrr only knew what was intended but does not seem to know for sure, while Jessica more clearly places DeOrr with her grandfather. DeOrr was told by Jessica, this is what happened - he was playing with grandpa? DeOrr is giving the vague narrative, Jessica is trying to make it more specific.

DeOrr has great concern centred round 'a small area'. He says, more than once, that not a trace of his son has been FOUND, which I think may indicate he has fears that there are traces which may still yet be found. He speaks so much about this, and about search and rescue because it is foremost in his mind, his concern is not over what fate may have befallen his son, but over traces of DeOrr being found within a small area of the campsite. The main search is done, and no trace has been found so far, thus his strange sense of exultation, perhaps self-congratulation - it's probably more relief than duper's delight.

I think DeOrr was 'there' the entire time of the initial search, as he claimed, but rather than search, he hid away to avoid questioning, as he was not evident amongst those searching. I think he was not seen searching, thus the rumour arose that his company would not let him come home off the road to look for his son. (Did he also return 'home' to look for something?) He was concerned that he may have been spotted hiding away by the night vision of the helicopter, particularly by the guy hanging off the side of the helicopter, who was close enough for DeOrr to have seen him looking down - he hoped he had not been seen by him. If they could spot a tiny orange insect repellant can, they could surely see a guy in a bright orange jacket? Whether they could see the colour of anything, I do not know, only that DeOrr was told they could, and may have been spooked by that, and by the search being 'not' suspended, but scaled back after this, and taken in a different direction involving only the professionals. 'The hearsay of things has gotten out of hand' -I think by this point the camp had been declared a crime scene.

I think there was a sudden catastrophic accident (which may have involved little DeOrr tripping over his blanket and being found upside down) or incident - 'just in a split second your whole world is upside down and vanished - there's not a trace found.' Jessica 'he is everything to us' - their whole world. 'This is an exact replica of a security blanket -for everybody, this is his actual blanket.' I think it possible that DeOrr's blanket was lost or left with DeOrr, and his spare blanket was in the truck - DeOrr's truck, or at home in grandpa Kunz 's truck. Jessica's 'who would harm us in this way?' - it seems he was not abducted, so this may be an attempt to strengthen the idea that he was abducted by someone who knows them, or she may suspect something she is unable to say - that what appeared an accident was not, and that DeOrr was deliberately harmed by someone known to them.

'As a father who is very concerned, along with the whole family, we'd love to get the whole state of Idaho up there, but in such a small area, which has been combed and combed and combed something may have been missed - trust me with such a small area...'

DeOrr is asked about the vigil, but seems to be addressing evidence. The family would be frantic, not merely very concerned, over a missing child - so that is unexpected. It's a given that the family would be frantic, so there is no need to say it, or the lesser 'very concerned' - I think he can't help it, because they are very concerned about something for which concern is fitting, yet not to the point of being frantic, as so far the concern has not been realised. DeOrr brings the family in here, wishing to share responsibility, they would all love to get the whole state of Idaho up there. I think there is much concern by some family members about this very small area which has been combed so many times. I think DeOrr is quoting the police, who are saying 'something may have been missed' - it's the reason they do not want more people up there. I think DeOrr's concern is not that something may have been missed but that something may still yet be found, and this is why they want to bring up yet more people, under the guise of a vigil, to trample and destroy any possible evidence which may remain within that small area. 'Trust me with such a small area...' He hopes he can be trusted to have done a good job in eliminating any remaining evidence, so far, so good, all those grid searches, no place or space to walk or park? - but is still anxious in case any trace can still be found.

The insurance angle is interesting, but I can't find intention to harm the baby in their language, and am considering only the words used by the parents in the first interview. It's difficult to think any of this, particularly on account of DeOrr's upset towards the end of the interview - but I keep in mind that they say the baby is everything to them, their world - they will be devastated at his loss, even if they are not being truthful, and are covering up his death.

Since you seem so sure, please show us your documented evidence and peer-reviewed scientific research that proves reverse speech is not valid or accurate. Go ahead, we'll wait- we just won't hold our breath, for obvious reasons.

Reverse speech may be considered a pseudo-science at this juncture (as was forensics, dna, fingerprints, atomic energy and even electricity at one time), but discounting something just because you don't understand it only shows your lack of breeding, comprehension and education.

Wilson MacGregor Barmy • 2 months ago

thats not how it works, the person making the claim is the one that needs to provide proof, there is no proof or even reason to speculate that reverse speech is accurate or valid. it is nonsense.

− Avatar Barmy Wilson MacGregor • 2 months ago

There are numerous websites that show proof the technology works. Next time, try a little research first. Better to hold your tongue and let people assume you're an imbecile than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

I chose 'other' on the poll but did not leave a comment, as I posted above instead. I am not sure of neglect, or unintended death - I tend towards an accident - if that is so, and if it arose from his not being attended to then I would say accident caused through neglect. If an accident without neglect, then one catastrophic enough to cause them to cover it up. Hit by truck, left sleeping in hot truck, overdose, falling into creek, wandering off - disappearing - even a shooting accident, all these I think would have led them to call 911 without delay, without needing, or taking time to decide when to do that. Following Bad Mommy's comment on an earlier thread, I did wonder round a burn injury left overnight, which could cause a child to deteriorate more rapidly than the parents' might expect - but DeOrr's language makes me think it was sudden and unexpected, in which case it may not have involved neglect, but was too terrible to be able to explain. It's possible he fell in the creek - again, they'd just call 911, unless perhaps they had thought he was asleep and found him only when it was evident he had been in there for hours. Since Trina's 'cannon ball' comment I have wondered if someone was playing with a gun, didn't see little DeOrr where they 'couldn't not see him', and he got hit, his being so small making it appear as though he had been hit by a cannon ball. In that case, there would be no doubt be an abundance of blood and tissue evidence - besides, they were fishing, not hunting, and it was not hunting season. Would they have had guns with them, to protect against wolves or other predators coming into the campsite? It is too much to consider, but shooting accidents do happen - again would they not have called 911, as they would know immediately if such an accident had occurred? Terrible, but sometimes, if not often babies. One of them could not have accidentally shot him, him being so tiny in the long undergrowth, and been unaware of having done so, perhaps for hours, could they? Unlikely, as one doesn't shoot without a target - if someone thought they saw an animal move and stupidly shot a baby by mistake, they would go over to see what they had hit, and immediately call 911 - unless they feared it would not be considered an accident. He's small, but he moves pretty good - he also does not leave his parents. This makes a shooting accident even less likely, as they would have been near him, and visible, and no-one shoots innocently towards people.

It's possible he fell in the fire, and they didn't discover it for some time, but I shouldn't think that - I would not have considered it had DeOrr omitted to mention that the baby was going to be good with grandpa by the campfire. The dogs kept returning to the camp - I don't know if that's because it is what they do when they can't find a trail, or if it is because there was one small area in which they were alerting to little DeOrr.

DeOrr says 'sorry' once, at the point he accidentally says 'Snake River'. Is the body in, or buried very close to the river (Jessica - he could be very close, he could be far away - paraphrased). Is there some favourite spot where the body may be hid, and where DeOrr intends for it to be found later?

I have to go for 'other' - I have too many doubts and questions to be able to make a confident choice, rather than having any clear alternative theory - I'm not sure that any of the options quite fit.

If your child was missing, the expectation is:1. You react swiftly. 2. You do anything asked of you3. You are not satisfied with police while your child is not found4. You don't care what anyone says about you; you only care about what your child is going through.5. You tell the truth6. You pester police. You wake up in the. middle of the night, remembering some small detail that you think might help.1.There is either a real or perceived notion the Kuntz did not react swiftly.2. They have not been openly hostile or uncooperative and have participated in search efforts. They have been unexpectedly silent, especially Jessica, when it comes to using any attention offered to further the search for their son. I think of the tenaciousness of someone like Beth Holloway. 3. Kuntz Sr. unabashedly praised search and rescue very early. 4. In form they have been concerned about what people are saying have done alot of story building and haven't offered any overwhelming concern for how Deorr is. 5. The truth is relative at this point. There have been no confirmed lies and yet there are many questions regarding their description of what happened. If it doesn't make sense it's usually not true. 6. Not sure if they have pestered police but have seemed very satisfied with LE efforts which is somewhat unusual. They did hire their own PI which could be interpreted as dissatisfaction. It is not clear if they sought him out or the other way around. I think overall they have not given statements or reacted as innocent parents would.

The simplest, most likely explanation is often the right one - that would be that he was left sleeping in the truck and overheated. I agree with those who think this would have been established early on (even through questioning alone), if that was the case. It's also likely the cadaver dogs would have alerted to the truck, had a body been in there for any length of time, unless it was swapped with a different truck. If there was a body, but no dog alerted and it had not been in any of the vehicles, how was it hidden or, possibly, disposed of? If none of the vehicles caused the cadaver dogs to alert, was a dead body ever in, or transported, by any of them? Maybe Snake River does not relate to a body, but to something else.

---

Anon at 10.35am - I like how considering reverse speech invalid is due to lack of breeding, comprehension and education - whoever wrote that either has a few inferiority complexes, or is trying to convince those who do, that those of good breeding, comprehension and education will naturally embrace backwards speech, because that's what intelligent superior beings do. Lols. :-)

I've tried to verify my hypothesis but am unable. The excessive and sequential use of "up" and "down" in Deorr's statements is confusing.

I've considered the possibility DK was above campground, looking down into the creek from the top road. He saw Deorr Jr. fall into the water and disappear out of sight.. Maybe by tripping on his blanket (explains sensitivity: replica, JM holding onto blanket, etc.) DK states, a few times, his biggest concern is the water.

"...just a split second your whole world is upside down and - vanished,..."

This selection bothers me. There is something important here.D: that we don't know is...I come to find, I didn't know the area, and I didn't know, I ..there, it's very open but you can't see much ...there's a road that goes up and along the top - we're camped underneath the reservoir, basically right below it, and you can go up above the reservoir, and I didn't even know the road was, did that, I didn't know the road was up there, and as I travelled up there myself, I could've found out [?] I could see everything that was going on at the campsite, but you can't see out - you can't see up, you can't see round and if anyone comes to the bottom of your camp ground you can't even see they are...interviewer: So they could've come to your...

It would also explain the present tense. He was gone, that's all they knew. Perhaps he could have been found alive somewhere down the waterway. That could give them some hope.

The unexpected praise the SAR helicopter was to persuade and prevent further searches. By then, he became resigned to the fact Deorr was dead. He had lost his son through neglect but at least he would not be demonised or arrested. He was shocked they SAR hadn't found Deorr, adding to his excitement.

Several things have always bothered me regarding dogs/search. First, the dogs scented at the water in reservoir, not the creek. This was later explained with the dumping of the cremains. The reservoir is not a large body of water, nor is it deep. Dad himself said you can see the bottom all the way thru (paraphrase). Second, the sheriff did not make this a crime scene. There were searchers, volunteers, etc. tromping all over that place for I believe, days. I saw one clip on the news where it showed Dad taking off from their "set up camp" on a 4 wheeler and I thought, "They just let him go off BY HIMSELF on a 4 wheeler?" He could have moved the remains, destroyed evidence, anything at all. Third..they had scent dogs also, why?? They let mom drag his blanket everywhere so she was spreading his scent everywhere she moved. Why wasn't this confiscated and tested for trace evidence? The unexpected, "this isn't a replica" may be just that, a replica. If your child died due to neglectful "accident" would you bury your child with the real thing? That is one of the most bizarre statements I have heard anyone say about their missing child..."This is not a replica, this is the real thing." Need to persuade, leakage, because they KNOW it is in fact, a replica?

Also, it was reported that there were people camping "up" at the reservoir. They saw nothing. Since it wasn't hunting season I would also think that they could and would have heard a gunshot very clearly. I don't think it was a shooting accident.

“We decided we were gonna do a little exploring,” Kunz Sr. told East Idaho News. “It’s such a small area — that’s what a lot of people don’t understand. They just assume, ‘How could you let your kid out of your sight.’ Well, this area is pretty well blocked in and there’s no way you couldn’t not see him"

This statement alone is so contradictory. If it was such a small area and you there was no way you could NOT see him, why didn't anyone see him?? If its so small, you would easily be able to see an adult skulking around to wait to kidnap your child. "You couldn't not see him"..is this leakage that they did not see DJ when he died? He was out of their visual site because he was napping in truck where he died with his blankie? Just some thoughts

“We decided we were gonna do a little exploring,” Kunz Sr. told East Idaho News. “It’s such a small area — that’s what a lot of people don’t understand. They just assume, ‘How could you let your kid out of your sight.’ Well, this area is pretty well blocked in and there’s no way you couldn’t not see him"

This statement alone is so contradictory. If it was such a small area and you there was no way you could NOT see him, why didn't anyone see him?? If its so small, you would easily be able to see an adult skulking around to wait to kidnap your child. "You couldn't not see him"..is this leakage that they did not see DJ when he died? He was out of their visual site because he was napping in truck where he died with his blankie? Just some thoughts

'This is an exact replica of a security blanket -for everybody, this is his actual blanket.'

He's saying it's a replica and also that it is his actual blanket. I think that's so, it is his blanket, but it's a duplicate spare they have for when the original is in the washing machine. etc.

---

Ima.grandma - in the section you highlight 'myself' has just jumped out. Someone else maybe had been up there earlier and told him that they had been up. Or maybe LE had told him of the view from up there, in order to test his reaction, and so he'd subsequently gone to check out what the view had been for anyone who might have been looking down at the campsite. He is concerned that someone saw something. I think the present tense can be explained by the fact that they are still staying at the campsite, and so it still applies.

Concerning issues (not necessarily said in close order) the father has said the following: "there's a problem", "seen him to the point he was gone", "dead panic", "knew I was in trouble", "it was me", "concerned father", "put to rest", "sorry".

He is very sensitive about both the water and the truck. Did he die in the truck and was moved to water, did he die in water and was transported afterwards in the truck?

Father mentions "not the case" several times when the mother is speaking to a possible kidnapper and getting their son home. What's not the case? That he's kidnapped or coming home?

Mother uses "if" when stating someone may have kidnapped him, she doesn't seem to be convinced someone took him and says "please don't hurt him", I don't know if hurt is a flag here that maybe the baby was hurt earlier somehow (might also explain her cradling her arm with his blanket) or if she is just a worried mom praying someone has him but isn't hurting him. I think as a mother I might say something like that because one of my first thoughts of a kidnapper would be a pedophile. It doesn't seem unreasonable to plead with a possible kidnapper to not hurt your child. Not sure what hurt means to her in this context though.

Also, human remains may confuse some cadaver dogs but not to the point they can't tell the difference between soft tissue/body gasses and ash remains. It may have confused the dogs for a short time, but a well trained cadaver dog will not stop there. I've seen assumptions made that this is why the dogs alerted to the water and the truck. No to both most likely. The dog alerted to the truck because at some point in time there was a dead body there or it was a SAR dog alerting that the boy had been alive in the truck. Dogs alerted to the water, because the live trail stopped there or the dead body was there at some point. It's not clear which types of dogs alerted where, but alerts in both areas as well as Dad's sensitivity to the truck and water lead me to believe something happened in the water and dad moved him in the truck or he was already dead in the truck and the body was hidden in water. The first is more likely since no one located the child in any of the water nearby. However, we don't really know time lines of how long the child was actually missing, whether Dad left by himself other than 1/2 mile down the road to make a call, whether both parents were in fact together when they realized baby Deorr was missing.

Lynda - it became a crime scene once they'd got the family and all the volunteers (anyone I called - DeOrr), out of the campsite. The family set up camp further down the mountain at that point and were not allowed back into the search area. They were no doubt diplomatically informed that this was because untrained people would hinder the search from that stage onwards, and it would be too traumatising, should anyone, especially family, happen across a body after so much time had passed. I am not sure at which point DeOrr was filmed on the search vehicle. Undoubtedly it was not treated as a crime scene in the first couple of days - it only became a crime scene when it became evident that they were not dealing with a lost child, which was not expected, thus the likely and unfortunate loss of evidence, if there was any. It certainly was treated as a crime scene, but only once it had become apparent that a crime might have been committed.

---Also, Mariah, Jessica's sister, referred to DeOrr as DJ in her Facebook post yesterday - you just reminded me of that. So, he was known as DJ as well as Lil Man - that's good to know, as Lil Man is not a name.

CS - please will you post where it has been reported that any type of dog alerted to the truck? All I have seen reported is the reservoir, and that the dog/s kept returning to the campsite. If there is more information from a reliable source it would be much appreciated.

Buckley, Angelica, and everyone else bothered by Daddy DeOrr's "so sincere, so concerned..."- I couldn't agree more! Isuspect the sensitivity lies in that DeOrr is aware that he's insincere with his gushing praise. He's also uncomfortably aware of the deception he's perpetrating here from "I don't know what today is.", to the let's -go-exploring story to the cell signal-hauling story. You're right that he catches himself, realizing how distant and impersonal he sounds about his own missing son, and hurries to tack on the "as anybody would be of a two-year old..." comment. It is EXPECTED that LE and searchers would descend and search frantically for a missing toddler in a wilderness situation, with known predatory animals. Searching with sincerity and concern are the norm, but not to DeOrr and not about the search for his "missing" son.

Quick aside: I recently took some elderly friends to a specialist (one of the best in the country). I was amazed at his skill, thoroughness, and concern (particularly since it involved all-day testing, tons of support staff, no lunch breaks for the staff, 3 full exam rooms + a crowd waiting all day long, and this is their normal). This Dr. and his staff's commitment was unlike anything I've ever seen. Not once did I describe them as sincere though. Likewise, I've never described Emergency personnel as sincere...that's the expected.

Juliet @8:50- Your 1st paragraph made me go back and read Peter's transcription (Interview w/ DeOrr 1st part) for the umpteenth time. The interviewer begins by asking when this began and specifically says Friday. You are correct...DeOrr does indeed immediately deflect. The "this" the interviewer is seeking is when did they discover DeOrr missing (and the events surrounding that moment)= The Expected. DeOrr has a problem with that question- he shouldn't have if his child has indeed just "vanished with no trace" while they were "exploring". Nowhere in the interview do either Jessica or DeOrr say that little DeOrr disappeared, vanished, went missing ON FRIDAY...only that Jessica called "search & rescue" at 2:26 on Friday.

Foolsfeedonfolly - I like it when you post and run - it's better when you stay and post more, though.

Thanks, yes - I am convinced he went missing on Thursday, some time after the store sighting - they may have had all night and the following morning to make arrangements - if he was not abducted. I don't even know why I keep bothering with the caveat - probably because I want to believe them, and still hold out some vain hope that he might still be alive. But they saw no-one, heard no-one, no vehicles - in such a safe, small enclosed area. Enclosed - who he is trying to kid? Where is the open wilderness ever a small enclosed area? Walls of mountains do not a playpen make. :-/

Also, Jessica does not assert /allow that it's Friday that little DeOrr disappeared. We know from Peter that sometimes yes or no questions are not as high stakes. In this case, she follows that yes with a clarification..."It was 2:26 when I called." She is confident in asserting this because that is both true and verifiable. The issue is the interviewer is essentially (albeit too casually,too broadly)asking when did DeOrr disappear. DeOrr and Jessica are answering when they called...two totally different things. Like so many of you, as well as Peter have said, where they choose to begin in an open statement tells us priority. They both know what the interviewer is asking and what he's looking for, but they're crawling through the linguistic loophole he gave them. His inexperience or softball approach (to foster friendliness and sypmathy=guarantee the interview) allows them to get away with it.

Very strange to me that he has to tell us what the security blanket is, in the negative. " this isn't an exact replica of a security blanket, this is his actual blanket."

Jesus and Deorr Sr. Seem to stress this a lot, that it's his actual blanket which to me makes it sensitive, bc as a viewer I would just expect them to bring his actual blanket if they had it, I would never assume they brought an exact replica if it was left behind. So that has always struck me as odd as well.

Jessica texted her mother at 2:28. How could she call 911 at 2 :26? She texted her mother first with "911" then she called it. Her mother called her but she didn't answer probably because she was on the phone with 911. Jessica didn't call 911 until 2:36 per the 911 transcript.

I wonder what was the point, anyway? Why bring the blanket into the interview - it's not as if people can look out for the blanket if the parents have it. They are not asking an abductor to give their baby any type of little fleece blanket to help comfort him - so,what's the point? It proves he was abducted because he wouldn't willingly leave these things behind? No, as he wouldn't have been lugging all three about in the wilderness, whilst wearing oversized cowboy boots, anyway - he would likely have had one or another, but not all three with him. I think the blanket is a prop - it may be providing some comfort, but it is also a sympathy prop. We don't need to know about the blanket or what it means to him - only what NOT having the blanket is going to mean to a child who has supposedly been abducted. No expression of concern for a living distressed DeOrr - so I think they know, one way or another, that he is not in need of his blanket.

I think I took this from another comment and it's not been confirmed by a reliable source of any scent alert other than the reservoir. I apologize if I misled anyone, I'll keep checking to see if there is any other mention of scent at the truck.

Anon at 2.25 -DeOrr starts to say it was 2.26 when he called - Jessica interjects that it was 2,36 when she called 911. How do you know Jessica texted '911' to her mother? Has Trina stated this anywhere? I thought that text was about female items/feminine products.

Off Topic:http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2015/09/16/former-star-trek-voyager-actress-arrested-for-allegedly-exposing-herself-to-children/

“Started saying vulgar things. I mean really vulgar things, I told her to mind her own business and keep on walking,” Smith told the ABC affiliate.

According to Smith, Lien then began exposing herself to the children.

“All of a sudden, here come the shirt up. She started flashing and, ‘Woo hoo,’ and I said, ‘And what respect is that for kids?’ There was none. And then she turned around and dropped her pants,” Smith said.

When police arrived at Lien’s house, they found an open front door, and entered at the request of the former actress.

Roane County Sheriff deputies said they found Lien naked on her couch, covered with a blanket.

--I'm inclined to believe the actress exposed herself since she was found naked on her couch with the door open. What is interesting is the neighbor's words, which are full of deceptive red flags.

Juliet at 2:48 exactlyAnd in your previous post, I know he said it's an exact replica (leakage?) But I always thought he meant this is not an exact replica, bc why else would you say this is an exact replica, this is his actual blanket, you know what I mean? Either way you are right,but I can't help thinking that maybe they buried him with his blanket which made it so sensitive. I don't k ow why I feel that way. But I do.

WhoaAnon @ 3:34Sounds like she has some guilty knowledge to me.Why would anyone think Trina "did" anything to Deorr when she was supposedly not even there. Next she says "nor know anything about my grandson."No name for Deorr.So basically she didn't do whatever it was and she doesn't know anything about what was done. That is so odd.

Anon - at 3.34 - Trina's message to you is too difficult for me to analyse, as I don't know enough statement analysis and don't want to throw out hasty/inaccurate judgements on a grandmother in her situation - but thanks for posting it here, others with more experience will likely have some ideas.

Whoa, though Isa - we don't know the context. Was Trina responding to a question, and what was the question?

---This seems as good a place as any to lament my failure to copy and paste the questions Trina was responding to in the FB comments I saved a while back. The context - argh. We live and learn. :-/

“The sheriff told us in all his history he’s never seen anything like this,” Grandmother Trina Bates Clegg said Sunday night in a phone interview with EastIdahoNews.com. “Right now they have ruled out that he has slipped and fallen in to a creek. The creek has been cleared…and (the sheriff) is 100 percent confident that (Deorr) wasn’t in the creek.”

“My dad was STANDING there watching him and he turned his head and then (Deorr) was gone,” Clegg said. “It appears like he just vanished.”

These are some of the earliest family quotes. I am curious if she offered the first paragraph without a specific question.

"I will make myself very clear I did not to anything nor know anything about my Grandson. This honestly breaks my heart."

sounds like NOT a reliable denial. She doesn't know anything? Nor did she do anything? What is anything? DJ is missing, he vanished, no one knows where he is, or what happened. Wouldn't a reliable denial be, "I know nothing, nor did I have anything to do with the disappearance/kidnapping of my grandson Deorr." Honestly is a need to persuade?

I voted for neglect, unintended death, and cover up. I'm not certain who did what, though.

I don't believe Jessica had any idea where her son was at the first interview. When she pled for his return, she always included leaving him where someone could see him and return him. Guilty parents do not do that. They don't think ahead like that because they're simply putting out words, knowing their child is not returning. Jessica may know, or at least have some idea now. To not say a word, to not plead at all for her son in the latest interview, was telling.

I don't know what to make of Deorr Sr. We have been over his areas of sensitivity many times. I agree with every one of them. But areas of sensitivity do not make him guilty of killing little Deorr. Those areas need questioned further. Maybe there's an explanation for each one. Maybe he's a yakker when he's nervous. Maybe, and I do suspect this, he has a language disability which causes him to use incorrect words. Deorr Sr said some things which stuck with me. One being that he uses "my son"...still to this day. He used "my son" in asking how it was confirmed about the boy in California. Secondly, even with all his praise of the "creek searchers", he twice said no one could 100% assure him Little Deorr wasn't there. (paraphrased) Notice in the latest interview when Trina is speaking of why they still search every weekend (last place Little Deorr was), Deorr Sr throws his hands in the air. He shows exasperation with the question, like "of course I keep looking where he was last." Isn't that what we all do when we lose something? We return over and over to where we last saw it. Deorr Sr just acted like that was common sense. He doesn't know where Little Deorr is.

Cont.I feel the parents were neglectful to leave Little Deorr at the campsite. They may also be untruthful about how long they were gone and if they were in the truck.

The time they were gone allowed ggp and/or IR to cause Little Deorr's death and cover it up. I'm not sure how that played out. I have this gut feeling IR caused the death, blamed ggp and pretended to cover for him. He manipulated it to seem like he was helping ggp when he was helping himself. Somehow the cover up seems to be between these two.

This is a winking nod of agreement to Lynda's post at 5:13 (which is good, by the way). DJ is vanished? Well, not exactly.

In ima.grandma's post at 4:37, let's see what Trina said about that..."It appears like he just vanished." What, Trina? You've looked into Jessica and DeOrr's eyes and you're satisfied with their answers- satisfied that it only "appears" like he just vanished? What were the questions, Trina? (Questions plural because "answers" are plural) Trina, knowing Grandpa, Jessica, and DeOrr won't commit to little DeOrr vanishing...she knows the players better than we do. Just sayin'.

Anon at 2:25: you are incorrect about the 911 call. The time stamp is 14:28 in the recording. 2:36 is when they say they called in the interview.

What I find bothersome is the disconnect between the feisty comments Jessica has made in social media and this huddled, trembling, sniffling, shell on the couch in the most recent interview. If she's really that distraught how does she find the ability to lash out at people online?

The 911 call was made at 2.28 and 4 seconds.(according to the 911 time stamp at the beginning of the call.) DK asks if it was 2.26 and Jessica "corrects him" with "it was 2.36 when I called" Jessica is out by 8 whole minutes. WHY? In the first few minutes of the interview, days and times are already being confused. Is it deliberate?

Yep, I just listened. That was Ole Jer reading it off a piece of paper in his "whatever" voice. Then Deb jumps in with "Just drop her off anywhere. We don't care. Someplace safe."

Compare that to Jessica:"Even if you just have to leave him at a store. Where somebody else will see him and bring him home safely to us. I don't - just drop him off somewhere where somebody is at so they can see him and bring him home."

Imagrandma at 4,37 - it's interesting that right from the beginning they were not saying his name - 'DeOrr' in brackets and 'sheriff' in brackets indicates that grandma said 'he' in those places, and the name was edited in with brackets by news staff for clarity. :-/ Indicates distance, or won't say his name because she believes he is dead - though considering lack of contact with her grandson, it could be distance.

I would love to believe events went down exactly as DeOrr and Jessica imply, simply because I want little DeOrr to be alive, cared for, left unhurt, somewhere someone can see him. Unfortunately, DeOrr, Jessica, and Trina won't let me because their words, lots of words that contradict themselves and each other, tell me otherwise (contradictions that our forum companions have doggedly dissected I might add).

Both of your posts reminded me of something that has bothered me a lot (Aside: I seem to have a lot stuck in my craw when it comes to this case I know). I find it odd how often DeOrr and Jessica used and continue to use words and phrases referring to seeing. If you're asking a kidnapper to please drop off your son, the assumed is that he/she will drop him off somewhere people can "see" him...is it not? The few times Jessica (and only Jessica) has addressed it, she always adds language about seeing him. Coupled with DeOrr's near incessant talking about how much "you" could "see" at the campground, how much "you" could see at the reservoir above the campground, that someone else could "see" into their camp, what the search helicopter could "see" (which prompted Jessica to chime in), and DeOrr's "I seen him...", The initial interview was almost obsessive with visuals. He talks about what they couldn't see, about Grandpa turning his head for a minute (i.e. not seeing).

The sheer detail in that initial interview is almost overwhelming. One would think DeOrr has a photographic memory during some parts, yet he's strangely vague in others. Typically I would attribute minute detailing to fight or flight response. However, in this case, the subjects begin their recollection AFTER what should be the peak stress (DeOrr discovered missing). The events are all out of order and the ones that should be most traumatic (i.e. emblazoned on the brain) and painfully detailed are the most vague and visually lacking.

We, the public (otherwise known as "you")are asked to keep sharing his picture (visual), keep our eyes out (visual), etc. Both DeOrr and Jessica rarely actually asking people to look (visual) for DeOrr...definitely not The Expected. I find it odd that we're not asked to search any of our properties surrounding Timber Creek Campground, in and around Leadore, near the store they stopped at Thursday night, or the route along the way (one road, in one road out).

Just an aside: In the beginning of the initial interview DeOrr heavily stresses that "they assured me, there is 100% chance that he is not anywhere in that water, around that water" as he's praising empty-handed searchers. However, toward the close of the interview after he details the grid searching efforts, he ardently and adamantly declares he will stay on the mountain with "...so everything has been 100% thoroughly checked but nobody can guarantee me 100% so I'm gonna keep looking."

I find his "Daddy's going to find you..." very creepy, especially given his seeming excitement/relief that searchers couldn't and didn't find a trace of little DeOrr with their hundreds of trained and volunteer searchers, extensive grid searching methods, horseback searchers, heat-seeking helicopters and equipment, scent and cadaver dogs, divers, etc. On one hand he seems to need to encourage the search because it furthers the abduction story. Yet, on the other hand, he readily discounts all their efforts with "Daddy will find you." How could he, unless Daddy knows where little DeOrr is? Typically, such a heroic statement is made by an emotionally driven parent, distraught over what might be happening to their child. Very little thought is given to how little DeOrr must be feeling/thinking or what he might be experiencing. It's all about the parents. I have to question how "attached" Little DeOrr really is to them and them to him, especially in view of Jessica's custodial issues. No slams or judgement intended.

Just because these people had a careless moment and lost a child does not mean everyone else should be expected to give up their constitutional rights.

After navigating an area lined in police tape, I entered a big box store for a few items. While checking out I noticed a man on a scooter with a black T-shirt that read:This is the Anniversary of the Day I Stopped Caring.

Jessica: we'll continue to look until he is found - we don't care how long it takes, we, and we think as many people that have shared the story and continue to share his pictures and things like that, if somebody has him, they'll eventually bring him back...and they will come forward with some sort of information.

Fools and Buckley,The visual is interesting. I'll have to think on it.

That Jessica says "where somebody can see him" is what I think makes hers different. She doesn't just say a safe place, she pictures him being seen....and it's in the future. It's a subtle difference. I hope this makes sense.

Just to play devils advocate with myself, what do you all make of this post of Jessica's? Anon posted it on sept 12.

Jessica MitchellA lifetime of pain?! Angie are you delusional?! And how dare you say that my Son is deceased!!!! Until you have proof of anything quit running your mouth!!!! You're not a cop or a detective so quit trying to play one! I really really pray that you or anyone else talking crap on my family doesn't ever have to experience the pain of a child going missing. I wouldn't wish this upon anyone ! ALL WE WANT IS OUR SON HOME!!!!!

I agree with Sus that Deorr Sr. to me has ineffective grammar. There seem to be some markers where techniques, of which I possess no skill, can be applied related to pronouns, parts of speech and verb tense. I do not think every phrase he uttered has an embedded confession. I'm not a grammar expert either but for instance WAS is a past tense verb but it's progressive and usually used with an ing verb. It sounds like someone is talking in the past tense but in context if they are recalling something that already happened they could use was, because by the time they are telling, it already happened. I think Mr. Kuntz may have even used was but incorrectly (with no hidden meaning). Things like that make things he said well off. I do believe there are indicators of deception. My imagination is not really as highly spirited as some though. :)

"Bonneville County Sheriff Paul Wilde and Lemhi County Chief Deputy Steve Penner want to make sure all tips regarding the case are directed to the Idaho State Police Fusion Center....The sheriff's offices are concerned that if tips are directed solely to a private investigator, valuable information that could solve the case may be overlooked."

She capitalizes Son improperly. Could be like an Angel? She follows "how dare you say my Son is deceased" with the thought "until you have proof" She changes from a personal "my son" to "we" and "our son."

Your post just made me realize that Little DeOrr has no voice after the store sighting. The voice he's attributed with there is crying. :/

There's a slight problem with that:1. This is supposedly a child who's very attached to Mom and Dad-so attached that he never goes away from them, per Jessica & DeOrr.2. This is a two-year old supposedly at naptime, in a different environment(being expected to sleep somewhere he doesn't normally sleep, in broad daylight, someplace new, with a new person there, etc.).3. This is a toddler supposedly being left with Grandpa and a total stranger to put him to sleep, not his mommy.4. This same toddler isn't even laying down or being geared down for a nap with any of the usual naptime routine tricks moms use (reading a story, cuddling, singing, rubbing the toddler's back/forehead, tucking him/her in with their lovey) but he's "going to be fine next to the fire with Grandpa"- according to DeOrr.

What was so important that DeOrr & Jessica couldn't wait another 10-15 minutes for the toddler to go to sleep? Presuming of course that Daddy & Mommy are telling the truth. ;)

FFOF...I was just coming in here to type exactly what you did about the word "see" that seems to be WAY overused. My first reaction was that Jessica did not "see" her son die. The way dad is saying all forms of "see" could also be the same reason? If true, this would fit with the in the truck napping and died from hyperthermia. Neither one of them "saw" him die.

Why is there not one concrete detail given about baby DeOrr's actions, interests, what he was eating, behavior, mood, verbalizations, etc given by either parent while at the campsite or even during the drive up? Anything would suffice. "He was excited to go camping." "He had just eaten a hotdog." "He had been running around picking up rocks." "He loved eating marshmallows by the fire." "We had just put a sweatshirt on him." Do you see where I am going with this? Anyone who has ever had a 2 (almost 3) year old will mention something the toddler was were doing, especially in a different environment. You would think in this situation, anything baby DeOrr had done, said etc would seem especially important and emotional for them. The parents do not even say "We wanted to go exploring for a 10 minutes, HE WANTED TO COME (this would be an action/attitude of baby DeOrr), but it was almost his naptime, so we figured he should stay behind with Grandpa". There is not ONE mention of a single action, attitude, mood, food eaten, verbalization, etc from baby DeOrr given from either the trip up to the site or at the campsite. Just wanted to point that out for what it is worth.

SusFrom their recent statement Please keep your eyes out for OUR precious baby boy. WE miss HIM so much and JUST WANT HIM home where he belongs. If YOU have OUR son, please don’t hurt HIM just bring HIM home to US.

I think they show attachment and he wasn't abused (not to say neglected) by using the pronoun OUR? "Our precious baby boy, our son." But HIM is a common noun. When asking we look out for Deorr, he's our precious baby boy. When they miss Deorr and want Deorr home he's a common noun, him. When someone has Deorr he's our son. When asking not to hurt Deorr, he's a common noun him. When they love Deorr he is Lil Man. This may be meaningless. I sense a dis-ownership. It's strong possessive when they say the things they may know aren't possible. (someone seeing him, someone having him) weak when expressing their feelings or concern.(missing him, not hurting him,loving him) He also isn't a family member, a son, then.From her post you cited:How dare you say that MY son is deceased. Says my son when he's deceased. I don't have a to fruition meaning of it and it may not be bear out in all statements.

Wanted to add one thing, and I've noticed others talking about the sensitivity of the blanket/blanket replica: the parents have said that baby DeOrr carried the blanket wherever he went (the father said "even if he had to trip on it" he would carry it with him). My son had a bear he would carry EVERYWHERE at that age. What I don't understand and what I think may somewhat explain the sensitivity is why don't these parents say where the blanket was left by the toddler? This would be extremely important information. ie. "He carries this blanket everywhere. The blanket was found on the ground 10 feet from the fire." If this kid carries this blanket everywhere to the point where he will trip on it (that's how my son was with his bear--it WENT everywhere with him!) then these 2 should be stating WHERE THE BLANKET WAS LEFT when the toddler vanished even if it was just left near the fire or whatever.

I hope someone that knows more about this chimes in...like Peter! I think I understand Peter to explain it like this. Parents will distance themselves from their child while they are in danger, while they are abusing them, or while they are missing if they are the perpetrator. They may after the fact if they are abusers and feel the child is now safe in Heaven.

So what is she saying? It seems to me she is not distancing herself, he is "my son" even though the worst may have happened and he is deceased. I do not like that she connects "until you have proof of anything" to deceased, but it may be that she herself cannot accept he is dead. Her anger may be a stage of grief. Heck, I don't know.

I think they are being coached by their PI in a negative way. Time will tell. The sheriff and the game warden are most likely to be the ones to find the boy. Hopefully they will stop the harassment even if it means putting a stop to the 1st Amendment.

Anonymous said...Well Trina's phone received a text from Jessica at 2:28. I would provide the screen shot if I could. She must have called her mother, then texted her and immediately called 911. September 17, 2015 at 6:20 PM

"I really really pray that you or anyone else talking crap on my family doesn't ever have to experience the pain of a child going missing.

There is one word I really don't like in above statement. It is the word "a".

She is fuming mad while writing the statement, therefore it should have come out as "your child going missing".

Big difference. When you read it as she wrote it as "a child" you don't feel as heartbroken, but when you read it with "your child" you want to cry for her, cause you can feel her pain. But it says "a child".

Anon who says he or she saw Trina's messages - is there a screenshot? You say 'the screenshot' and that you would post it if you could - so it sounds as if you do have one. Could you post the screenshot?

Anon - why do you assume hacking? It's easy enough to get a screenshot of anything, even someone's phone messages, if you find a need to do that, and if you have a phone or iPad to hand - a screenshot takes a second. A hacker also has enough knowledge to be able to post a screenshot online anonymously.

Anonymous said...Well Trina's phone received a text from Jessica at 2:28. I would provide the screen shot if I could. She must have called her mother, then texted her and immediately called 911.September 17, 2015 at 6:20 PM

REALLY? Interesting....* T C *September 17, 2015 at 11:49 PM

Anonymous said...Next time you're hacking into the cell/computer of the family, why don't you leave your advertisement demonstrating how much better their lives would be if you could handle all their correspondence?September 18, 2015 at 6:02 AM

TC? Trina Clegg? I also find this interesting. Drama is the center of this family's dynamics, long before little Deorr's disappearance.

I think Jessica maybe says 'a' rather than 'your' because she wants to distance herself from the person she is addressing - she's already said 'you' - 'your' would make it more of an engagement, and she doesn't want to talk about 'your child' with the person who is attacking her about her missing child - so she says 'a' - it's less personal, more FO.

Plus, why would Jessica want to think about her antagonists' children, presumably all snug in bed, while their smug demon-antagonist perfect mothers wish her a lifetime of pain on account of her missing child? 'A' is quite generous and restrained, actually, along with everything she said there, given the circumstances.

I know, in context, which is that the search was ongoing, that it might not be entirely unexpected for him to say 'not a trace of my son has been FOUND' - but I would prefer him to have said, 'we still can't FIND him' - 'we just want to FIND him' - instead there is all this concern about traces of his son not being found - he concentrates on what hasn't been found, rather than that they have yet to find him, and want to find him. What would you say?

--

Where are the clothes which were on the filthy bawling child who matched 'our description of our son'? 'It was me' - said DeOrr, in which case, it was also little DeOrr? His dirty clothes would have been changed by the Friday - and those would provide some evidence of little DeOrr having been there, no doubt, and maybe how/where he picked up the dirt. Can they not account for those clothes- is that why the sighting is such a problem? If the clothes had been there - that would be a trace, add some support to their claim that he had been there - the lady in the store might even have been able to confirm or discount the clothes as those which the little boy had been wearing. If not, there would still be Thursday's clothes, in evidence, at the campsite? Perhaps the clothes were there and are part of the evidence submitted to the FBI. It's frustrating to not know what is meant by 'not a trace' - of evidence that was ever there, or that he disappeared, and was lost, from there? I doubt if the blanket, monkey and cup would serve as adequate evidence of his presence, as those items could just have been taken along.

Jessica, in her 911 call says 'my two year old son - we can't find him'. We don't know what DeOrr said in his 911 call, but has he said 'no trace of my son has been found' more often than he has said, 'we can't find him' or 'we don't know where he is'?

LEMHI COUNTY, Idaho -The parents of missing 2-year-old DeOrr Kunz Jr. as well as a private investigator and a Lemhi County Sheriff's deputy spent Monday afternoon re-enacting Kunz's disappearance at the Timber Creek Campground southwest of Leadore.

Kunz went missing at the site on July 10.

Frank Vilt, the private detective who's been looking into the case, said the purpose of the re-enactment was prove his theory that Kunz was abducted.

Vilt said Kunz's parents left him with his grandfather the day of his disappearance while they went to scout fishing locations.

“The grandfather could have been distracted,” said Vilt.

As part of the re-enactment, Vilt used a girl around Kunz's age to demonstrate how easy it would be for someone to abduct a child from the remote campsite.

“This gentleman who was camping here went inside his trailer just for a moment and I just walked up and took the child, the child came with me,” said Vilt.

After Monday's exercise, Vilt said he's more sure than ever that Kunz was abducted and that Kunz's parents had nothing to do with his disappearance as some have suggested.

“Very small time window of time, but I feel that he was abducted. At least you can't disprove that he wasn't abducted,” said Vilt.

As Local News 8 reported Monday, Vilt is currently looking into reports of a suspicious-looking man seen staring at children across eastern Idaho.

The man is described as being in his 50s and having whitish-gray hair with curls at the bottom. He's reported to be driving a new-looking black Jeep Rubicon.

Kunz's mother said she saw the man looking at her son the morning of his disappearance at a store in Leadore.

About a week later, a local couple said they saw a man bearing the same description staring at their kids while hiking at the Palisades, and later, at a store in Swan Valley.

Vilt said he's working on obtaining a sketch of the man. In the meantime, he's asking anyone who may have seen him to call 888-852-6505.

If he disappeared on the Thursday, and was wearing pyjamas, he had perhaps been put to bed, woke and wandered into whatever accident befell him - 'you couldn't not see him' - but you might be less likely to see him, if it was heading toward dark, and if you were not looking out for, or expecting to see him, because you thought he was snug in bed with his monkey and blanket, and fast asleep.

I think the second story has been edited in to include the Sheriff's office? Or perhaps it was also on another news site which didn't include the Sheriff's office - I noticed that it didn't, and that it was the Deputy rather than the Sheriff who was making the request for info to go to the Fusion Center rather than to the Sheriff's office. Either that's how he wanted it to be, or it was an accidental omission which has since been corrected.

To clarify - Deputy Penner did not say to give info to Fusion Center rather than to the Sheriff's office - just to give it to Fusion Center - I just noted that he didn't also say to give it to Sheriff's office in the earlier or otherwise other report - not sure if it's been edited.

Facebook post (not sure of date ~ one of you will know but it's early)Trina Bates Clegg I'm TRULY unaware if there is live recording at the store there are camerashttp://www.eastidahonews.com/2015/08/lemhi-sheriff-opens-up-about-deorr-kunz-case/"I don't believe the store has a surveillance (system), but we have a receipt that shows they purchased certain items," Bowerman said. "The time was stamped on the receipt, so we believe that's where they went."

Bowerman's interview is dated 8/15. I'm sure Trina posted early July. Bowerman is deceptive, he knows if the store has surveillance. He further states the following in same interview:

Bowerman wouldn’t go into details about what specifically has been turned over to the FBI but he said he wants “all bases covered” to help solve the case.

“We’ll wait until we get the report from the FBI,” Bowerman said. “It’s going to be critical in this case.”

My conclusion: The FBI has the video. Trina and Sheriff are deceptive.

"This search has been cancelled due to circumstances beyond our control and all donations will be refunded. While it's disappointing we are trusting there is a good reason for LE requesting no outside searches at this time. Our prayers continue to be for Deorr Kunz Jr to be found."

"I think an abduction is one of the least likely events," Bowerman said. "Grandpa was SITTING within 20 to 30 yards of the only roadway into the campground, and absolutely no one was seen at that lower campground coming or going."

“My dad was STANDING there watching him and he turned his head and then (Deorr) was gone,” Clegg said. “It appears like he just vanished.”

GGP began watching Deorr sitting in his chair. (he's old, he's tired, he's sick, probably suffering from the yoke Deorr's parents place around his neck daily leaving a toddler in his care.) GGP turned his head for a bit and then stood up when he noticed Deorr out of sight.

Sheriff Bowerman: “Well, the family, from what I understand, that we learned during the investigation arrived the evening prior to July 10th, sometime, uh, fairly close to dark on Thursday, July 9th, and then, uh, they went to uh…went to town in Leadore and upon returning they supposedly thought they were turning their child over to their uh, grandfather – the child’s great-grandfather. They went down to the creek which is right next to the campground, and within 10 to 15 minutes they go up to find their child to show him some fish in the stream and he’s nowhere to be found. Grandfather assumes he’s gone down to them because he was within their line of sight and uh, wasn’t too far from the campground. Uh, they started their initial search and eventually called 911 when they realized they couldn’t find the child. “http://bit.ly/1NxhpJr

Let's break it down:

the family arrives the evening prior to July 10thfairly close to dark on Thursday, July 9ththen went to town in Leadoreupon returningthey supposedly thoughtthey were turning their child over to their uh, grandfather – the child’s great-grandfather. they went down to the creek which is right next to the campground, within 10 to 15 minutes they go up to find their child to show him some fish in the streamhe’s nowhere to be found. Grandfather assumes he’s gone down to them because he was within their line of sight wasn’t too far from the campground. they started their initial search EVENTUALLY called 911 when they realized they couldn’t find the child

Conclusion: Deorr drowned Thursday night. The surveillance video from the store will prove Deorr was not with the parents either trip to the store. This explains why Deorr throws out "as a family". Remember, people don't like to lie. He does not issue a reliable statement asserting Deorr was in the truck with them at the store. That's why they focus on the three (3) items (he never goes without) left in truck

I think I didn't communicate correctly what I meant about Jessica's statement "I really really pray that you or anyone else talking crap on my family doesn't ever have to experience the pain of a child going missing."

I had said I didn't like her use of the word "a" when she says "a child going missing" instead of "your child going missing", not because I thought it meant she wasn't thinking about the person she is angry with's child, but because it completely distances herself from her own missing child. It makes the "pain" completely separate from her.

It is not natural for her to state it that way.

Here's an example. Let's say someone's house burned down due to no fault of their own. Let's say someone was antagonizing them about it in some way, perhaps saying it was their fault for whatever reason. When the victim of the house fire lashes out in anger at the antagonizer, he or she will say "I hope you never have to experience the pain of YOUR house burning down!" NOT "I hope you never have to experience the pain of A house burning down."

That one small word "A" changes the meaning of the sentence from making the individual loss a personal very painful loss that would effect the person deeply to making it a random loss for which the person would not be concerned.

If MY house burns down, I would be very concerned. If "A" house burned down, it would have most likely not effect me, as it would not be MY house.

To me, it's one of those verbalizations that should be instinctive, kind of like pronoun use. The fact that she says "a child" instead of "your child" when fuming with rage, is an unnatural way of stating it. In my opinion, which certainly could be wrong, but just wanted to explain it better cause I didn't feel I did.

I, for one, do not subscribe to the drowning theory. The words "truck" and "back" are sensitive to Dad, so I fear Baby Deorr (1) was struck by the truck while it was being backed up; or (2) fell out of the back of the truck, whether it was moving at the time or not. I also wonder if GGF was indeed the one "minding" the truck and looked away just "for a minute."

I DIDN'T know does not preclude the possibility that she knows now, does it? (Rhetorical Question)

I still think that if he ODd on something he got into accidentally or was given for pain or sleep, that was NOT intended for children, and ESPECIALLY if not legally possessed by any member of the camping party, and given Jessica's other kids being in custody of their father, I can see why they might panic.

They can't call and report the overdose to get him help, or it will be discovered what he took. Maybe they hope it will wear off and he will be okay. By the time they realize it is too late, they decide not to call LE and report the accidental OD, and can't pass it off as any other kind of "accident" since an autopsy will reveal the drug/medication in his system.

I still think Mom and Dad went for "a walk" to use drugs or have a sexual encounter, and were gone longer than they say. If this "exploring" was instigated by Dad, I can see Mom (although she went along with it at the time) blaming him now.

Juliet said... Anon who says he or she saw Trina's messages - is there a screenshot? You say 'the screenshot' and that you would post it if you could - so it sounds as if you do have one. Could you post the screenshot? September 18, 2015 at 7:41 AM

Imagrandma at 11.23 - I think it was grandpa Kunz rather than great grandpa who did some of the daycare - they lived with him, and in one of his interviews he describes how little DeOrr would snuggle up with him for his nap. The blanket was in the truck, he says - still would like to know which/whose truck.

Angelica, yes - I see what you are saying, but I don't think that has to be the only explanation for her use of 'a' rather than 'your' - it could maybe be due to avoidance/distancing between herself and the woman,because those are horrible exchanges - I don't know - except it's interesting. Maybe she knows DeOrr is not missing, as such, and so she can't say 'your' but she can say 'a'.

Imagrandma - do you find the Sheriff's narrative a bit patchy? You know - when's 'then' - is it then or is it the next day? Sounds like then, which is more usual than then being the next day, but I don't know - minnows in the dark? Are we sure there were any minnows around two, at nap time. Two at night, two in the afternoon. The number of minnows a child might like to see while he's asleep could be a real issue, too. :)

It's so minimalist of the Sheriff to have related things in this way - too minimalist, no timeline at all - I find it doesn't help.

Imagrandma - do you find the Sheriff's narrative a bit patchy? You know - when's 'then' - is it then or is it the next day? Sounds like then, which is more usual than then being the next day, but I don't know - minnows in the dark? Are we sure there were any minnows around two, at nap time. Two at night, two in the afternoon. The number of minnows a child might like to see while he's asleep could be a real issue, too. :)

It's so minimalist of the Sheriff to have related things in this way - too minimalist, no timeline at all - I find it doesn't help.

Juliet said... Anon - why do you assume hacking? Clearly Juliet you are smarter than that?

Anonymous said...Juliet, I saw Trina's cell phone text messages.September 17, 2015 at 3:14 PMWell Trina's phone received a text from Jessica at 2:28. I would provide the screen shot if I could. She must have called her mother, then texted her and immediately called 911.September 17, 2015 at 6:20 PM

((Obviously)) they hacked her phone Anonymous said...Next time you're hacking into the cell/computer of the family, why don't you leave your advertisement demonstrating how much better their lives would be if you could handle all their correspondence?September 18, 2015 at 6:02 AM

I think little DeOrr disappeared shortly after the store sighting, in his dirty clothes - well, IF they haven't been produced, because it's likely that he would otherwise have soon been calmed down, cleaned up and changed, if he had been in such a filthy, distressed state? So, quite early evening, I think - if there are no Thursday clothes. And if the store sighting hasn't been discounted, which, I don't believe it has? The Sheriff does not mention it, but that's not the same as saying it has been discounted.

((Obviously)) they hacked her phoneAnonymous said...Next time you're hacking into the cell/computer of the family, why don't you leave your advertisement demonstrating how much better their lives would be if you could handle all their correspondence? September 18, 2015 at 6:02 AMSeptember 18, 2015 at 3:18 PM

Juliet, I apologize but am unable to concentrate to respond. I've been using this case the last couple of days to block out a personal crisis. My daddy is scheduled for open heart surgery on Monday. I'm packing now to go stay with Mama. This is my last post for awhile, this is why I posted my thoughts.

I believe the cover up is because they had been using illegal drugs and it would cost DeOrr his job/career as a truck driver if he was a known drug user, and it would cost Jessica her other two children. In their drug influenced brains, it made sense to them at the time to hide it.

It has never seemed to me like Jessica had/has any interest in raising her other two kids herself. I wonder if some of the distress we see in her is guilt because she's partially relieved that the responsibility of parenting is gone now?

The sheriff is a family friend as well, correct? The sheriff is also a co-owner of the mortuary where the cremains came from that were spread up at the reservoir? The woman spreading the cremains was also a registered sex offender against a child/children? And she also is an acquaintance of Isaac R.? The P.i. is a family friend as well?This is all so tangled.

From Where is Deorr Kunz Jr page

Anyone know anything about this or is there any truth to it?I know she's an RSO, PI is family friend or was, but the rest???

Well, according to the interviews with Frank Vilt posted above -ggp entered his camper while he was to be watching Little Deorr.-Vilt went so far as to call ggp negligent by entering his camper.-IR lawyered up immediately (because of his criminal record)-the reward is raised to $20,000.

Those are some pretty interesting points. $20,000 just might flush out anyone who is on the verge of talking...if they had been told anything by a POI. That's my guess only.

Is PI confirming they had been in the store before they arrived at the campground before nightfall Thursday? I think so - he is saying the creepy guy who was staring at DeOrr might have followed them to the campsite. so tueymwere at the store before they arrived at the campsite - this could be the six o clock sighting? Still listening.

DeOrr Sr and the Lady tipster (or Frank Vilt) describing the car exactly the same (very expensive looking black Rubicon) And the tipster is from Idaho Falls.

Frank Vilt says he knew DeOrr Sr/Jr from when he took his car to the body shop he worked atand that DeOrr Sr took Jr to work with him. I find it hard to believe he took a two year old still in diapers to a body shop.